The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged even though the defendant did not have committed an injury by taking the head of the victim F by carrying with or dangerously dangerous goods from the camping net, and the defendant did not have instigated the perjury to H, B, E, and K. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment, and one year and six months of imprisonment, confiscation, and collection KRW 800,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination on the assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles must be made to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt as to the formation of a conviction in a criminal trial. However, it is not required to exclude all possible doubts, and rejection of evidence recognized as probative value is not allowed beyond the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence. If the witness's statement is consistent in the main part of the statement, the credibility of the statement should not be denied without permission on the sole basis of the above legal principles (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do12112, Aug. 20, 2009). 2) The following circumstances recognized by evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the trial court, namely, when the victim F, the defendant, his head, and G with H, and the defendant's statement was made with the defendant's hotel room No. 604, Feb. 2, 2004.